News Lions Board Spill - update: Board Dispute Resolved

[Lionator]

It's one of many arguments for removing both sides of the insidious boardroom brawl that has derailed the Lions.

most in here thought the board was derailed long before Williams\Power challenged.
i was relieved when somebody stood up and said enough.

The fact that Leigh backs Power/Williams alone is enough for me.

This comment adds weight to the conspiracy theory that Pinskier is only here to discredit power /Williams ticket.

This has really turned us into a laughing stock. Bring on the EGM.

 

[Betty Noir]

You are proof we didn't get the top-secret email list some in the Lions Roar group obsess about.

I lied, so I guess that means you did get the top secret list that we are obsessing about, (by your infallible standards of evidence! LOL)

 

[MacMum]

You are proof we didn't get the top-secret email list some in the Lions Roar group obsess about.

We??........and who might that be Mr Pinkster?

 

[dlanod]

The hilarious and hypocritical thing about these ravings is that he's calling for an EGM, but he hates the organization that did the actual work to ensure an EGM. He claims it was at the behest of Williams/Power/Matthews, which it was, but doesn't explain who else was going to be triggering an EGM.

Why wasn't he agitating back then? If he deigned to venture down from his mountain top earlier, TLR might have collected signatures for him to lodge. There's no way in hell or high water that the Johnson camp was going to be soliciting an EGM. That only left one camp, and his stated goal of Matthews on the board wasn't going to happen any other way.

Anyone had one of those bosses that swans in after all the hard work was done and tries to claim all the credit? That's what this tosser reminds me of with his misdirections. His repeated inability to actually answer direct questions on any number of topics renders him a sideshow compared to those actually interested in putting effort into the club instead of just self-aggrandising.

 

[bumtown]

My concern is the latent membership that are in the voting member's database that haven't been engaged by TLR or kept abreast of developments through reputable media sources.

They are the ones that could be the silent majority and mobilized by populist bullshit without substance.

Victorian members having much higher per capita voting rights than Queensland members and their general disillusionment with their treatment by the club, and the AFL, could have a significant impact if they aren't able to be engaged.

Pinskier seems to be using the low-road to target these disenfranchised members and I am worried about the impact this could have in the long run.

This. The vast majority of Vic members will be voting via proxy and I would suggest more than a fair slice aren't particularly enamoured with anyone on the board, Powers + Williams included. The potential end game that concerns me the most is Leigh getting elected to the board in a faction of one.

 

[mpal6]

Dr pinskier's next blog post - bigfooty crazies blah blah blah.

 

[bumtown]

Dr pinskier's next blog post - bigfooty crazies blah blah blah.

Just say no to big oil, er... big tobacco, no wait, big footy!

 

[Haso]

Morning Henry Pinskier, where did you get your email addresses from?

 

[Haso]

Why wasn't he agitating back then? If he deigned to venture down from his mountain top earlier, TLR might have collected signatures for him to lodge.

But he didn't. He didn't deign at all.

Disappointing

 

[Scubaveg]

Okay, so now I know 4 things:
1. I want angus gone
2. I don't want raving lunies so Henrys out.
3. I want Lethal
4. Power has enough money himself to secure the clubs future.

So I guess I really know 5 things because I know which way I'm voting to.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[Hollow Knight]

When will he deign to tell us where he got the membership emails?

 

[Skoob]

We??........and who might that be Mr Pinkster?

 

[lukiuslion]

can people explain to me how the voting process works? Is it a vote for either ticket? The most stay, or a vote to save each director and majority rules, I am not up with this stuff and TBH have no idea what the process is and what the outcome will be. In short - how do we ensure that Leigh Matthews is a director of our footy club ASAP?

can anyone help me out here?

 

[notting18]

can anyone help me out here?

It'll be a vote per resolution. For Leigh to be elected, the Life Member and Leigh resolutions need >50% of the voters.

 

[knaf]

Dr P you have been asked repeatedly by a number of respected posters (who have demonstrated their commitment to the Lions over a long period of time) to answer a couple of basic questions.

The two questions:
1. Where did you get the email list from?
2. Who are the "we" you are claiming to support your push and as a consequence you are putting forward as the alternative Lions Board?

You have failed to answer both questions and I cant even find acknowledgement of the second question.

Like most posters I have googled you so I have some background to your suitability as a board member. However your lack of genuine response to these question is a concern to me. Until they are answered I have to conclude that you are disingenuous and assume your motives for starting this campaign are not in the best interest of the Brisbane Lions FC.

 

[John]

Did they not collect signatures for the removal of just one side of the factional brawl on the board?

If it walks like a duck and squawks like a duck and craps on members like a duck then it is a duck.

Well no they did not and to imply anything other is false. They called for an EMG to clarify the split in the board.

Henry I am not a member of Lions Roar nor am I even a Lions member with voting rights. If you would like to look at my posting record on this site you will see that I have not joined the fray and made comments as to the club logo, jumper nor the state of the board. In fact the biggest criticism of me that can be made is the pathetic piss take I make on a regular basis.

So with sad comedic attempt at being Switzerland I have been an interested observer and I have noticed that the Lions Roar have advocated one thing, the change back to the Logo/Jumper but I have yet to see or read anything that even remotely has made me think that they have taken factional sides.

With this I am going to call you out. You offer nothing and I suspect that you may in fact be looking to support the Angus faction by splitting the opposing vote. This chat about Mathews. Get him to support your faction and then see how the reaction is around here because so far you have been treated with derision. By my observations you are also considered suspect by friends who are not involved in Big Footy / Lions Roar but have voting rights at the club.

You my factional warrior need to lift your game.

 

[whatboutbob]

It'll be a vote per resolution. For Leigh to be elected, the Life Member and Leigh resolutions need >50% of the voters.

Not 75pc for the change to the constitution...?

 

[Lion for Life]

can anyone help me out here?

Hey mate, i'm pretty sure that it will be a vote on the position of each individual director apart from 2 (Bob Sharpless & Peter McGregor), which will mean that if you want to vote in favour of the Williams/Power ticket, you would need to vote for them to keep their positions and vote in the negative for the rest.

 

[James North]

I do harbour some concern about the upcoming EGM.

• I wonder how many people are totally cool with the new Lion design, and just aren't saying anything?
• Just how many silent votes does Angus have up his sleeve?
• I think the "Life Member" resolution will pass almost unanimously, however.

The sample group we have in here is a bunch of passionate Lions supporters who come to a forum to express their opinions and feeling about the Club we're all into. I know there have been a lot of other avenues (FacieLoin's preferred method) for people to vent on the jumper and the Board, but is our internal polling accurate in the outside world?
The concern I have is about those who are pretty indifferent, and I wonder if that's a fair number? Whether they've proxied their votes off, or will just be happy with the status quououo.

EDIT: For disclosure, I like both the Lion's face and the Fitzroy designs ... but the front of the jumper should feature the Fitzroy Lion ... I think Angus should go, but I've needed him to go pretty nuts to conclude this (it didn't take him long), and LeighMatthews is a hero.

 

[POBT]

So with sad comedic attempt at being Switzerland I have been an interested observer and I have noticed that the Lions Roar have advocated one thing, the change back to the Logo/Jumper

I may be wrong but I don't even think they advocated for that. They advocated for a vote on the issue.

Going back through the various posts on their website, these are the three campaigns they have run:

1. That the AFL should schedule the number of Lions games required to be played as per the deed of company arrangement.

2. That the club should put the issue of the logo/jumper to a vote of members.

3. That the board instability should be ended immediately, if not via a mediated outcome then through an EGM where the members get to have their say.

On the last point, it is worth clarifying that The Lions Roar didn't "collect signatures" to remove Johnson and co, as seems to be commonly held. Members were asked by TLR to send their requisitions to the challenging ticket (eg Williams and co). As far as I can tell, TLR simply put the requisition forms up on their website and told people how to fill them out. Indeed, this information from their FAQs supports this:

Why does my EGM request refer to voting out Directors?

The official lodgement of collected EGM requests will be performed by the Williams/Power/Matthews ticket in their capacity as the challenging candidates. The challenging candidates must specify the motions they seek to be put to a vote - this is why the requests refer to existing Directors.
The Lion’s Roar wish to stress that our group is not committed to these resolutions - we do, however, seek that they be voted upon in the interests of stability and progressing the current stand off. Equally, we wish to stress that your signing and returning the EGM request is not an endorsement of any particular candidate or ticket. Your submission simply comprises a request to provide members with the opportunity to vote at an EGM.


I thought the Lion’s Roar was supposed to represent all members?


We are trying to.
We want the board to be unified.
Unfortunately, we currently have two groups of board members, one who is pushing for particular resolutions (the challenging ticket) and the other who has previously said this can wait until December.
The EGM forms must state the motions sought to be voted on by the challenging party.
We see ourselves as simply pushing for a member’s vote as to them, so as to break the deadlock - nothing more.
These resolutions would be tabled at the AGM in December regardless. All the EGM request form seeks to do is bring forward the vote on these resolutions to provide stable leadership sooner rather than later.

(emphasis added)

 

[POBT]

I

• I wonder how many people are totally cool with the new Lion design, and just aren't saying anything?

If they are members with voting rights, then they should get to the EGM and cast their vote against the proposed resolution.

I personally reckon it would be brilliant to see heaps of people rock up to the EGM and have a vigorous debate on all the issues.

 

[Ray Button]

One of the issues that has been highlighted by Pinksier's controversial emails to members is that the Power/Williams/Matthews ticket has (rightly) not had the same access to all members to push their views. They likely won't have that broad access leading up to the EGM and I wonder just how many of the Lions voting members follow forums like Big Footy, or even bother to look at the Lions and AFL websites. Obviously, the Angus Johnson ticket also has blanket access to the voting members' email and is starting to use that advantage.

Apart from a few articles appearing in the daily press, I'm worried that the majority of voting members are blissfully ignorant of the Williams/Power/Matthews' side of things, and either (i) won't bother to vote in the EGM, which wouldn't have any effect, or (ii) simply vote in favour of the status quo (Angus etc).

Anyone have any idea about what proportion of BigFooty Lions Board posters are actually members of the Lions, and how many of them are voting members? For the record I'm a voting member (x2).

 

[POBT]

Apart from a few articles appearing in the daily press, I'm worried that the majority of voting members are blissfully ignorant of the Williams/Power/Matthews' side of things, and either (i) won't bother to vote in the EGM, which wouldn't have any effect, or (ii) simply vote in favour of the status quo (Angus etc).

Johnson appears to have committed to giving each director 1000 words to say their piece. I think that is a fair outcome.

TLR's latest message says that they'll give all directors and prospective directors the opportunity to speak to members and supporters via them. So I guess there is another avenue.

Finally, we have seen that Williams and Matthews seem to have the ability to get traction with the main press outlets. Hopefully, that will balance out the advantage Johnson has by being able to use the club's official communication methods so that we have a fair fight.

 

[Ray Button]

Hey Henry, since you keep using Leigh Matthews name in vain, how about loaning him your members email database?

 

[Davemonkey]

Jaw droppingly selfish and arrogant.​

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...l-peace-proposal/story-fni5f4q3-1226740527627​

"Johnson had been banking on AFL support in his battle with co-directors Mick Power and Paul Williams but he discovered on Tuesday night the league was prepared to back a compromise board that did not include him and would be chaired by Springfield Land Corporation deputy Bob Sharpless with Mick Power as his deputy.

Linked directly to the proposal was a finance package that incorporated cash grants for an expanded football department and the capacity to pay 100 per cent of the salary cap, an underwriting guarantee and a profit sharing arrangement that could have topped $10 million.

The AFL currently underwrites Brisbane for $8 million and contributes more than $10 million a year to the club.

When Johnson discovered he was not part of the compromise board he immediately called the EGM for November 13.
​

Matthews described the move as a bitter blow for the football club."